Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Google Professional Cloud Network Engineer Exam - Topic 5 Question 120 Discussion

Posted by Carmela on May 07, 2026 at 12:49 AM

You are designing a packet mirroring policy as pan of your network security architecture for your gaming workload. Your Infrastructure is located in the us-west2 region and deployed across several zones: us-west2-a. us-west2-b. and us-west2-c The Infrastructure Is running a web-based application on TCP ports 80 and 443 with other game servers that utilize the UDP protocol. You need to deploy packet mirroring policies and collector instances to monitor web application traffic while minimizing inter-zonal network egress costs.

Following Google-recommended practices, how should you deploy the packet mirroring policies and collector instances?

Suggested Answer: D

Create Packet Mirroring Policies:

You need to create three packet mirroring policies, one for each zone (us-west2-a, us-west2-b, and us-west2-c). This ensures that each zone's traffic is mirrored appropriately without unnecessary cross-zone traffic.

Create Collector Instances:

Set up one group of collector instances for the us-west2 region. Having a single group of collector instances for the entire region minimizes the number of instances required and simplifies the management while keeping egress costs low since the collectors are within the same region.

Configuration of Policies:

Each packet mirroring policy should be configured to match traffic for its specific zone. Use instance-tags to identify and match the relevant instances within each zone. This helps in correctly capturing the traffic from the appropriate sources.

Filter for TCP Traffic:

Create a filter for TCP traffic (ports 80 and 443). This step ensures that only the relevant web application traffic is mirrored, reducing the amount of data processed and improving efficiency.

Cost Efficiency:

By having packet mirroring policies specific to each zone and a regional collector group, you reduce inter-zonal network egress costs. The data remains within the same region, avoiding extra charges associated with cross-zone traffic.

References:

Google Cloud Packet Mirroring Documentation

Best Practices for Packet Mirroring

Cost Management in Google Cloud

This solution aligns with Google-recommended practices by ensuring efficient traffic capture, minimal inter-zonal costs, and streamlined management of the packet mirroring setup.


Get Premium Professional Cloud Network Engineer Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
26 comments · newest first
GE
German 2 days ago
B could reduce overhead, but I prefer A for better control.
DA
Dallas 8 days ago
I like A for clarity. Each zone has its own policy.
CH
Chaya 13 days ago
D seems efficient, but having one collector group might be risky.
AN
Annice 18 days ago
I feel like C is too simplified. We need zone-specific policies.
RA
Raylene 23 days ago
Option B could work too, but subnets might complicate things.
RE
Reita 28 days ago
I agree, A makes sense for traffic management.
LA
Lashawn 1 month ago
I think option A is the best. It keeps things organized by zone.
SH
Sherell 1 month ago
Same here. Zone isolation is crucial for monitoring.
TA
Tamesha 1 month ago
I’m leaning towards A. It feels more organized.
HI
Hillary 2 months ago
Yeah, D might complicate things with traffic mixing.
GA
Gail 2 months ago
D could work too, but having one collector for all zones? Risky.
SH
Sherell 2 months ago
I think C is too broad. One policy might miss zone specifics.
TA
Tamesha 2 months ago
True, but instance-tags give more control over traffic.
HI
Hillary 2 months ago
But what about option B? Subnets could simplify management.
GA
Gail 2 months ago
Option A seems solid. Zone-specific policies make sense.
SH
Sherell 3 months ago
I agree. Minimizing costs is key here.
TA
Tamesha 3 months ago
This question is tricky. I feel like it needs careful planning.
GA
Gary 3 months ago
Wait, are we really only using instance-tags? That seems risky!
RE
Rebecka 3 months ago
D is interesting, but why mix zones with a single collector group?
LA
Lachelle 3 months ago
C looks too basic for this setup, we need zone-specific policies.
SA
Sabra 4 months ago
I think B is better, using subnets could simplify things.
CH
Cherry 4 months ago
Option A seems solid, matching by instance-tags is smart.
VI
Virgina 4 months ago
I think option D makes sense because it has separate policies for each zone, which could help with monitoring, but I'm not sure if having one collector group is the best approach.
CA
Carylon 5 months ago
I practiced a similar question where we had to consider traffic types. I feel like option B could be useful since it mentions subnets, but I'm not confident about that.
JO
Jonelle 6 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think using instance-tags for matching traffic is a good practice. It might be better to go with option A or D for that reason.
RO
Rossana 6 months ago
I remember we discussed the importance of minimizing egress costs, so option C seems appealing since it consolidates the collector instances.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel